Boomer Esiason says ESPN forced the Big East raid | Page 2 | The Boneyard

Boomer Esiason says ESPN forced the Big East raid

Status
Not open for further replies.
I kinda hope it's true. My gut tells me everything comes to a screeching halt, and there will be litigation

There's no reason to waste your time hoping for a legal fix to our situation because it does not exist. Even assuming that ESPN orchestrated the raid in an unlawful manner, there is nothing a court can do but award damages. No court can put the breaks on Syracuse's or Pitt's departure.
 
I am loathe to accuse anyone of illegal activity just because it is possible or rumored. Or, even to analyze the legality of what might have happened in a way that others will assume that it in fact happened. So, with my apologizes, until I have some facts (and Boomer repeating a rumor he heard is not a fact) I will be keeping quiet on this.

Give BL a break! He is erudite and literate but he is not a litigator. Spartacus has tried, and to the uninformed, been relatively able to sound and present himself as a litigator/lawyer, but to us working attorneys, he presents as a child who plays (note that I did not use the word "played") with his dad's law books. This story will end not with litigation but with negotiation--a business negotiation based not on: "a civil suit for tortious interference or some other action its lawyers can think up," but rather, on facts, facts to which BL is not privy.
 
Give BL a break! He is erudite and literate but he is not a litigator. Spartacus has tried, and to the uninformed, been relatively able to sound and present himself as a litigator/lawyer, but to us working attorneys, he presents as a child who plays (note that I did not use the word "played") with his dad's law books. This story will end not with litigation but with negotiation--a business negotiation based not on: "a civil suit for tortious interference or some other action its lawyers can think up," but rather, on facts, facts to which BL is not privy.
You should go play with your dad's books on etiquette.
 
You should go play with your dad's books on etiquette.

What do those etiquette books say about suffering fools huskypantz? Spartacus is, in this arena, an empty barrel, a particularly loud empty barrel, given his ability to string a cogent, if uninformed, sentence or two together in proper form. Your apparent defense of him is puzzling.
 
What do those etiquette books say about suffering fools huskypantz? Spartacus is, in this arena, an empty barrel, a particularly loud empty barrel, given his ability to string a cogent, if uninformed, sentence or two together in proper form. Your apparent defense of him is puzzling.
The books say that personal attacks surrounded by tangential ramblings are still personal attacks.
 
.-.
The books say that personal attacks surrounded by tangential ramblings are still personal attacks.

Thanks, although it seems that the books' lessons are falling on deaf ears.
 
Thanks, although it seems that the books' lessons are falling on deaf ears.

That was so very weak, young man. I was hoping for, at best, to issue you a "touche" or, at the very worst, a "mea culpa," Spartacus...is that really you?
 
I am loathe to accuse anyone of illegal activity just because it is possible or rumored. Or, even to analyze the legality of what might have happened in a way that others will assume that it in fact happened. So, with my apologizes, until I have some facts (and Boomer repeating a rumor he heard is not a fact) I will be keeping quiet on this.

I've heard for nearly two months that there were discussions between the ACC and ESPN regarding what exactly would warrant reopening the television contract to bring it up to market level (what market level became after the ACC signed their last deal).

While I would love to be able to b!tch and moan about how great everyone felt about the way things were until ESPN came along and decided to ruin everything, I personally believe that it was the ACC who initiated these conversations.
 
.-.
That was so very weak, young man. I was hoping for, at best, to issue you a "touche" or, at the very worst, a "mea culpa," Spartacus.

Eh. There's no reason to take the bait. I am confident enough in my own abilities and legal resume that I don't need to measure them against yours on a message board. Nor do I need to defend the merits of any substantive positions I took because, at the end of the day, you agreed with my post that there is no reason for UConn to make a federal case out of this. All you did was insult me, and since that's apparent to others on the board, I'm content.
 
So, going by the Blaudschun statement that UConn was the first choice over Pitt, and that BC blocked it, it's going to be quite interesting to see how this all plays out. How in the world is BC going to justify this?

Do you have a link for this? First I have heard of it.
 
What do those etiquette books say about suffering fools huskypantz? Spartacus is, in this arena, an empty barrel, a particularly loud empty barrel, given his ability to string a cogent, if uninformed, sentence or two together in proper form. Your apparent defense of him is puzzling.

Time for you to be banned again.
 
Really not a shocker. ESPN was not going to allow the Big East as presently constituted to enter free agency. The Big East basketball tourney would outdraw all other conference tournaments hands down, so the Big East was sure to get a nice payout from someone, so ESPN decided to weaken the basketball product, while gutting the football side.
Right, and with two programs the ACC could live with: Pitt and Syr. So, we need to counter with Temple and Memphis, a few others, and go to the 12/20 model. What's the difference anymore.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,249
Messages
4,559,843
Members
10,448
Latest member
MillerLitEd


Top Bottom